confluence_list_children

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully explains that the tool is a primitive, non-recursive listing with caller-driven cursor pagination. However, it does not disclose return shape, ordering, truncation behavior, or whether auth or read-only semantics are relevant.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three sentences with a clear front-loaded purpose, followed by usage guidance and alternatives. There is no filler, and every sentence contributes to selection or invocation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given six parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description provides strong purpose and routing context but leaves significant invocation details uncovered. An agent still lacks documentation for key parameters such as sort and max_chars, and the response behavior is not described.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It clarifies parent_type by mentioning 'page or folder children' and explains cursor by saying the caller can drive cursor pagination. But sort, limit, and max_chars are left entirely to inference, and the description does not compensate fully for the missing schema guidance.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with 'Primitive: list one direct level of page or folder children', giving a specific verb, resource, and scope. It explicitly restricts the behavior to one level, which distinguishes it from recursive siblings like confluence_get_content_tree and confluence_list_descendants.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states exactly when to use this tool: when one immediate level is needed or when the caller wants to drive cursor pagination. It also names alternatives and routing criteria, saying to prefer confluence_get_content_tree for recursive exploration and to start with an outline for large or unknown hierarchies.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.